JUDGEMENT
G.S.SISTANI,J -
(1.)RULE .
(2.)AT the request of the counsel for the parties, writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal.
Necessary facts to be noticed for the disposal of this writ petition are that the petitioner had applied to the DDA under the New Pattern Registration
Scheme, 1979 (NPRS-1979) for allotment of an LIG flat at Kondli
Gharoli, Delhi vide registration No.13405. Till the year 1989, no
allotment was made in favour of the petitioner, at the same time the DDA
introduced another scheme titled Awas Sakar Yojna (ASY) 1989. Under
this scheme, the registrants of NPRS 1979 could get their registration
transferred from a cooperative society and get allotment of a plot of land
to build multi - storyed Cooperative Group Housing flats. On account of
the long wait, the petitioner was tempted to take the benefit of the ASY
scheme. At the request of the petitioner, the registration of the petitioner
stood transferred to ASY 1989. Despite the registration of the petitioner
having been transferred, the DDA included the name of the petitioner in
the draw held under the NPRS 1979 Scheme in the year 1990. The
petitioner was successful and he was allotted an LIG flat in Kondli
Gharoli, Delhi. Despite this allotment having been made, the demand-
cum-allotment letter was not issued to the petitioner. The petitioner also
could not get any benefit under the ASY-1989 Scheme upto the year
1991. On 7th October, 1992, the ASY scheme was closed by the DDA and the registration of the persons like the petitioner, stood transferred back to
the NPRS, 1979 with an entitlement to get a flat thereunder as per their
seniority. DDA even formed a policy later on stipulating that such
persons will get the flat at the old cost when their entitlement become
due. In the year 1991 itself, i.e. on 03.06.1991 the petitioner made a
representation to the DDA that since no allotment was made in his favour
under the ASY scheme, therefore, the benefit of the LIG flat allotted
under the NPRS 1979 Scheme be handed over to him. No response was
received from the DDA to the said representation. Similarly situated
persons approached this Court, as the DDA had closed the ASY Scheme
on the one hand and on the other hand the applicants were not being
granted benefit of their priority under the NPRS 1979 scheme. This issue
was finally resolved by a judgment delivered by this Court in the case of
Frontier Avas Sakar Cooperative Group Housing Society and Ors. Vs.
DDA decided on 1st July, 1996 in which the DDA made a statement that
registration of all the persons, who could not get any benefit under the
ASY 1989 Scheme would stand transferred back to NPRS 1979 Scheme
and they will be entitled to get flats as per their seniority. According to
the petition, the petitioner made two more representations to the DDA on
12th June, 2003 and 26th March, 2004, explaining the facts of his case and requesting that a flat be allotted in the same zone and at the same cost of
the year 1991. To these representations also no response was received
from the DDA. After the judgment of this Hon'ble Court in the case of
Frontier Avas Sakar Cooperative Group Housing Society (Supra), the
DDA approved the case of the petitioner for allotment in the same area
and at the same cost. In March 2006, the name of the petitioner was
included in the draw of lots and an LIG flat was allotted to the petitioner
in Lok Nayak Puram, at the current cost, instead of Kondli Gharoli, in an
illegal, arbitrary and mindless manner.
(3.)THE petitioner on gaining knowledge about the said allotment made a representation to the DDA on 16th April, 2007, as the allotment cum
demand letter was not received by the petitioner, pointing out to the DDA
that he was entitled to an LIG flat in the East Zone/East Delhi as per the
approval given in his case and that too at the cost of the year 1986. No
response was received by the petitioner to the said representation as well.
On personal visits and queries made by the petitioner in this regard, it was
informed by the DDA officials to the petitioner that the matter was being
looked into by the DDA and the petitioner should wait for some time for
the DDA to take appropriate action in the matter and he would be
informed by the DDA in due course of time. After patiently waiting for a
period of about two years, the petitioner again made a representation to
the DDA on 12th May, 2009, reference was given to the earlier
representation dated 16th April, 2007. Another reminder was issued on 9th
July, 2009. In the absence of any response from the DDA, the petitioner
made an application under the Right to Information Act on 3rd June, 2010,
to get information about his case, in response thereto, i.e. on 20.07.2010,
the petitioner was informed that the original record of the file was not
readily available, and as and when the same become available suitable
reply would be sent to the petitioner. Thereafter the petitioner again made
representations to the DDA in the matter, on 26.10.2010, 02.02.2011 and
21.4.2011 pointing out that the allotment letter in respect of the flat allotted in Loknayak puram in March 2006 was not received by him and
that his case was covered under the policy and he be allotted a flat in
Kondli Gharoli.